Framework of Thoughts: A Foundation Framework for Dynamic and Optimized Reasoning based on Chains, Trees, and Graphs
Felix Fricke, Simon Malberg, Georg Groh

TL;DR
Framework of Thoughts (FoT) is a versatile foundation for dynamic reasoning in large language models, optimizing hyperparameters, prompts, and execution to improve speed, cost, and accuracy.
Contribution
FoT introduces a general-purpose, adaptable framework that enhances existing reasoning schemes with optimization features and dynamic capabilities.
Findings
FoT enables faster reasoning execution.
FoT reduces computational costs.
FoT improves task performance scores.
Abstract
Prompting schemes such as Chain of Thought, Tree of Thoughts, and Graph of Thoughts can significantly enhance the reasoning capabilities of large language models. However, most existing schemes require users to define static, problem-specific reasoning structures that lack adaptability to dynamic or unseen problem types. Additionally, these schemes are often under-optimized in terms of hyperparameters, prompts, runtime, and prompting cost. To address these limitations, we introduce Framework of Thoughts (FoT)--a general-purpose foundation framework for building and optimizing dynamic reasoning schemes. FoT comes with built-in features for hyperparameter tuning, prompt optimization, parallel execution, and intelligent caching, unlocking the latent performance potential of reasoning schemes. We demonstrate FoT's capabilities by implementing three popular schemes--Tree of Thoughts, Graph…
Peer Reviews
Decision·Submitted to ICLR 2026
- The proposal and distinction between execution and reasoning graphs, and the definition of allowable graph mutations (ancestors/descendants/exclusive descendants) during parallel execution, is well-motivated and easy to reason about. - Parallel scheduling plus two-tier caching is practical and helpful, especially for optimization loops where repeated calls dominate runtime.
Novelty is more infrastructural than algorithmic. Much of FoT bundles known ideas (parallel execution, caching, hyperparameter, prompt tuning) into a framework; the new scientific insight beyond system engineering is limited. The paper's dynamic graph proposal is interesting, but the story overlaps with existing orchestration frameworks (e.g., LangGraph execution DAGs, parallel branches, caching). The delta feels more engineering consolidation than a conceptual leap.
* Though not methodologically groundbreaking, FoT integrates fragmented optimizations (dynamic graphs, parallelism, caching, optimization) into a unified, modular framework. It supports diverse operations (LLM calls, tool use, code execution) via Python, lowering the barrier to implementing complex reasoning schemes for developers . * The work validates FoT on three representative prompting schemes (ToT, GoT, ProbTree) across varied tasks—mathematical reasoning (Go24), structural tasks (Sorting
1. Lack of Methodological Novelty: Core features are either existing capabilities or off-the-shelf integrations. * Dynamic graphs: LangGraph (2024) already enables adding/removing nodes/edges during execution; FoT’s separation of “execution graph” and “reasoning graph” is a cosmetic distinction, not a functional innovation . * Optimization: FoT directly uses Optuna (Akiba et al., 2019) for hyperparameters and DSPy’s COPRO (Khattab et al., 2023) for prompts—no custom algorithms or adaptive st
1. **Clear Problem Identification**: The paper correctly identifies several critical, practical bottlenecks in the implementation of advanced prompting schemes. The focus on systemic issues like static structures, execution inefficiency, and the prohibitive cost of optimization is a relevant and timely contribution to the field. 2. **Demonstrated Efficiency Gains**: The empirical results effectively showcase the practical utility of the proposed framework. The substantial speed-ups (over 10x
1. **Insufficient Substance for a Research Paper; Reads as a Technical Report**: The fundamental weakness of this submission is its lack of research substance. The work is presented as a research paper but its content and contributions are those of a technical report for an early-stage open-source project. It describes the architecture of a software tool that combines a few well-established engineering principles. While potentially useful, it does not propose or validate any new scientific hypo
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsConstraint Satisfaction and Optimization · Topic Modeling · Big Data and Digital Economy
